Nearing Completion of Evaluation of RS system (not)

Your understanding of this issue is impressive as it requires knowledge of problem gambling which is a highly complex multi spectrum disorder with many causes. You are correct that the goal oriented aspects of the RS system can be both a boon and a bane depending on other contributing psychological factors.

It is entirely reasonable to believe that it could help some and grossly hurt others. What concerns me most about Rob's attitude towards himself and his system is that he assumes that his own personal experience is indicative of a trend and that what worked for him would work for others just as well. I'm only talking about the psychological factors of his system here.

Rob feels really strongly that his system is less addictive and problem prone than AP and for him I have little doubt that he's correct. What we have to ask ourselves is how representational is Rob of conventional gamblers. I'm sure Rob would be the first to tell you he is unique. And so we must conclude that there's a good chance that what "worked" for him would not "work" for others. Many of the aspects of Rob's system are considered risk factors for pathological gambling and though for Rob these very factors have reduced his gambling it would be remiss to believe a similar outcome for all.

When dealing with people and psychology the one absolute is that there are very few absolutes.

Rob's post on the other site was so long I've broken it up and will reply in segments. His comments are in italic and my replies will be in bold.

ROB: I just read Frank's post on LVA reacting to how some people feel that a "pause" of a day or whatever in-between playing sessions in video poker is somehow different than simply stringing it all into one long session as far as play results go. In it he indicated an article he wrote on some geek-infested forum or site referring to some "Fairy" as well as several other characters only those with overactive & slightly troubled minds might conjure up in explanatory messages.

My article appeared in the BlackJack Insider News letter. I'm not sure if one would consider that a "geek infested" site. I'm also not sure if one would consider being a geek to be a bad thing where gambling is concerned. Geeks have a reputation for being good at math. I believe the reason Rob denigrates such thinking is because the large majority of "geeks" disagree with him. It is quite normal to look down upon those that look down on you.

ROB: As issues with vp go, right now Frank is immersed in what makes the Singer Play Strategy (SPS) tick, so it is only natural that when he doesn't understand something he will write about it over & over again until he has convinced himself I'm wrong and CASE CLOSED! And he well may receive the kudos, hand shakes, and pats on the back from a group of nerds who look at the world as one great big theoretical probability curve, but in the real world that route will never make the grade.

The article I wrote about a year ago, which was only just now published, had nothing to do with my current analysis of the RS system. Though the case is rarely closed on anything in science most of the research into what I talked about in the article was completed in the late 90's and many of the concepts were at least a hundred years older as they were first put to paper by such renaissance greats as Jacob Bernoulli, Daniel Bernoulli, Christiaan Huygens, Edmond Halley, etc... Probability, and its associated math, and people difficulties understanding it, is hardly a new concept and nothing I'm going to contribute much to in my life time.

This issue of course has arisen because of the way my strategy has been developed, which requires I play a session in Nevada, immediately drive back to Phoenix upon attaining my win (or loss) goal for the session, and not play again until returning to Nevada on my next trip. The big question seems to be, what difference could it possibly make how long....1 minute, 1 hour, 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, 1 year....before I went back for another SPS session? After all, the machines have no memory or clue and they do not know it's me out there, right?

Again the article was written before I started work on the RS system and had nothing to do with Rob specifically. People have been wrestling with these concepts for millennia, long before Rob was born and sill will be long after he is gone. I talk about the same issues in different words in my book which was written 10 years ago. That Rob thinks these issues arose because of him and are about him is troubling indeed. The content and consistency of my writing has not changed in anyway as a result of learning about Rob's system, nor will it. But suddenly in Rob's mind it has become all about him. Yes, troubling indeed. You have my personal promise that if I write anything specifically about Rob, I will include his name and make a point to state that what I'm writing about is related to him. If you do not see a specific reference to Rob, please know that it's business as usual and that I'm simply taking about the same things I have been since I decided to add my voice to the choir of gambling related material.

More later.

Someone please refresh my memory. Is the "evaluation" about:

A. Psychology
B. Gambling addiction
C. Rob's psychology
D. Can the Singer system help someone win
E. All of the above
D. None of the above

Thanks.

B and C. y/w

The only person who can accurately answer your question is Frank.

Yet, as you already know, and may have forgotten, or new information has become available, Frank has previously, and publicly stated he will no longer communicate with you, or answer your questions. He also "quit" your forum.

It appears obvious that he no longer wants to deal with you in anyway whatsoever.

So why do you continue to direct questions to him, knowing he will not be answering you?

And don't say you are looking for other peoples answers, because (to my knowledge) there is no one on this forum who is qualified to speak for Frank, or knows what he will write in his evaluation.

If someone else had asked, they would, perhaps, receive an answer. Maybe you should use your "other" LVA account and ask again.

sheesh.

Well oobiedoobie if that's the case it's a disappointment. I was hoping that an independent third party would evaluate Rob's method of play to determine if it can be repeated and if others could use it to win.

Unfortunately Harvard's study on gaming addiction says it affects 1.6 percent of the population and whether or not anyone here is addicted is of no consequence to me.

Frank is not a psychologist or psychiatrist or college graduate who even majored in the subject so he could only report on the findings of others.

So are we going to see 30,000 words of musings and quotes from others?

What did you do to poor roadtrip to get his panties riding so high?

I don't know what got RT so upset? Did he not like my reporting on TV in Miami? Is he dating Jenaphir?

LOL

No panties here, prefer Commando. Sometimes, on weekends, a thong.

Money has done nothing "to me" that I remember.

It's just that much of what he "writes" is, IMHO, either dissrespectful, attention grabbing, and often has inaccurate information that is twisted to suit his purposes, agenda, or needs.

A person's online reputation is based on truth, accuracy, respect, and other factors.

When that online "personality" is a "public figure", a "celebrity", and a "newscaster/reporter", than they have a moral obligation to be open and honest when "reporting", without an agenda, and to report the facts accurately and without bias. They have an obligation to be honest and to NOT intentionally try to deceive people, or be untruthful.

They may choose to grab as much attention as they can, that's their nature.

I just don't want to see Money waste his time asking for an answer from someone who most likely will not communicate with him, because unlike others on the forum, that person has kept his word.

::: shrug :::

The problem here RT is that I am impartial. But here in the world of the LVA forum if you are not against Singer there is something wrong with you.

Edited to add: and because I may be the only person here who has talked to both Frank and Rob from the start of this whole thing I have a good idea about what's really going on.